On Jan 13, 3:17*am, Don Foreman wrote:


Those who abhor violence might do well to focus on dealing with
violence rather than try to form associations between nutcases and
whatever political persuasions they dislike.

And even though we're all "pretty sure" that Gunner's talk of a "great
cull" is all just fantasy, it raises a couple of questions:

1) How do we _KNOW_ it's just fantasy? How do we know that his talk
should not be taken seriously and that we shouldn't drop a dime to the
FBI on him?

2) Is a person who obviously derives great pleasure from such
fantasies mentally stable? Should a person who talks incessantly about
violent acts, be they real or fantastic, be allowed to own firearms?
Where do you draw the line?

Just to be perfectly clear, this isn't aimed at Gunner alone. He is,
however a convenient example for discussion's sake.

1) We? *If you think someone should call the FBI and report Gunner's
great cull posts, *please lead from in front and do so forthwith. I
hope it makes you feel better, and I'll about guarantee that you'll
find it educational. Please keep us posted on your progress,
experiences and frustrations. *

Don, If I choose to call the authorities, you can rest assured that
you won't hear about it from me. Perhaps Gunner'll call you to beg for
bail money. I have personal friend who are FBI agents. I guarantee you
that there will be no frustration at all. I pass on a few usenet
postings, a name, address and phone number, and they do the rest. It's
what they get paid for, and they welcome such tips.

2) *The line is quite clear: freedom of speech that you might find
offensive is protected by the 1st amendment. Fantasy violence is not
illegal nor is it prima facie evidence of mental defect. *There are
video games available to teenagers that portray (and perhaps
encourage) violence far more vividly and graphically than anything
Gunner has ever posted on usenet in his best efforts to shock readers.

The teenagers who play those games do not, for the most part, own
small arsenals. Nor do they claim to. Nor do they brag about the
bodies they've buried in the desert. Nor do they invite their
adversaries to show-downs or knife fights (in the dark, no less). And
who is Don Foreman, and what qualifies him to be the judge of Gunner's
sanity? How do you know that Gunner's postings are just efforts to
shock readers? How do you know he's not truly a murderer? Because he
said so? Would you stake your life, or you kid's life on that?


With very limited exceptions, law of the land does not permit legal
action against another based on what he says or what others think he
might do.

That is true, and this week, we have seen the result of that. This is
a very tough nut to crack. I'm all in favor of personal freedom, but
there are certainly times when it's so ****ing obvious that someone
presents a danger. Are you suggesting that there's NOTHING that can be
done about that? One store refused to sell the shooter ammunition. Are
you suggesting that they were wrong to do so? if not, why not?

If you abhor violence then focus on miscreants that do violence rather
than those whom you think might based upon how you react to what they
post on usenet.

This is not abour how *I* react. the killer in Tucson had not
committed a violent act until...well, you know the story. Are you
seriously suggesting that the only solution to situations like that is
to wait for someone to die? Seriously?

I'm not pretending that I have the answers, either. But I *am* willing
to participate in the discussion. You, apparently have closed the door
on that.

Yer note about "not aimed at Gunner alone" duly noted. Target moi?

Did I say that? (hint...I did not.)

I am not zeolously either liberal or conservative and my religious
beliefs (or absence thereof) are none of yer beeswax. *

Who asked?

I am a gentle
and nurturing man, but also a vet and a realist. *I carry a gun some
days. *

Yes, Don, we all know that.

He who would mug or rape this senior gentleman will experience
explosively violent lethal response beyond anything he ever imagined.

Not if you're dead.

I may look like easy prey, low hanging fruit for predators... but I'm
not and they sense that. *Predators are street smart, focus on easy
prey.

And?

I am not a vigilante. *Could be, might become so if Mary dies
before I do. *

Sorry, I don't follow. Are you expecting to "snap?" Look, Don, I'm
really sorry that Mary is sick. She sounds like a great woman and a
great friend to you. I don't mean to be condescending here, really I
don't. You have to take care of yourself. You'll be no good to her if,
as her condition worsens, you start to come apart at the seams. Frayed
at the edges, sure, that's to be expected. But you'll be doing
yourself and her a favor if you invest some time now planning on how
you'll cope.


**** happens, life is fair now and then, here and there ... not fair
if Mar dies before me but life is hardly ever fair. *

And not fair to her if you should die first. Who ever guaranteed that
life would be fair? Sigh... But don't get me started on the
existential ****. I'm way too tired, and pretty damned well disgusted
from today's unfairnesses, which is a whole other story.